On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Phil McDonnell <[email protected]>wrote:
> In implementing PageSpeed I saw my overall reads go way up (~double), > which from a cost perspective is counter productive for me. Graph attached. > Does it make sense that we're seeing less caching with PageSpeed service > enabled? I will say that things are certainly faster on the site. > Wouldn't say that the graph is conclusive proof of that (less caching). Need to look more into what those requests actually are. Look in the logs for a start. Another thing, page speed isnt as such designed to 'reduce requests' to your "server" - but to increase the perceived speed of the page. Of course caching can reduce requests - and anything to reduce requests means the server is doing less, so it will have more time to serve real requests quicker. (but its doubtful if will really gain on AppEngine anyway!) And in some cases, even though PageSpeed serves a request from the cache, a request will still hit your origin. In particular so can still log requests coming though. Also note that you arent billed 'per request' - so it isnt necessarily costing more. (other than the explicit Pagespeed costs of course!) Its more important to reduce bandwidth and instance time processing requests. > > I will take a shot at the idea of caching in the Datastore. Seems worth a > try here and would definitely reduce reads a lot. > As a rule of thumb, cache everything you possible can! Use multiple tiers of cache! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
